Speculation: Nikita Kucherov's next contract

[DFC]

If it's a bridge, 3 years at 4.5/yr. If it's a 5-6 year, it's 6.2/yr.

If we pay him the same as Killorn, I'm gonna jump on the Yzerman-Is-The-Devil bandwagon.

 

[MattM92]

If we pay him the same as Killorn, I'm gonna jump on the Yzerman-Is-The-Devil bandwagon.

Well it's not much of a bridge deal if we're paying him what we would be paying him for a long term deal. Whole point of a bridge deal is to take less now for short term and cash in later at a higher cap inflation.

 

[TampaJay]

If we pay him the same as Killorn, I'm gonna jump on the Yzerman-Is-The-Devil bandwagon.

I hope I’m not considered in that camp. All I’m saying is that if a small move like trading Brown (MN needs depth) would get Kuch to 6 years and not insult him, then getter done.

 

[DFC]

Well it's not much of a bridge deal if we're paying him what we would be paying him for a long term deal. Whole point of a bridge deal is to take less now for short term and cash in later at a higher cap inflation.

One year at 4.5 miiiight make sense, but not three. But it seems like Kuch might sign a cheaper deal than we expected, so not a lot is making typical sense right now. In a good way.

 

[TampaJay]

Using Gaudreau as a comparable now, if we give Kuch slightly less, he wins big on take home pay, does better than Forsberg, Mckinnon, Barkov, Monahan, etc. so he is happy and we get 6 years and all it takes is one small move.

 

[RDTBay4]

What is the deadline for us to get a deal done before he hits the open market?

I am not gonna get excited until the ink is dry.

 

[Lord Stan 2020]

hi guys

 

[dechire]

What is the deadline for us to get a deal done before he hits the open market?

I am not gonna get excited until the ink is dry.

He's Lightning property until 2020 barring a trade or a signed and unmatched offer sheet.

 

[HoseEmDown]

I hope I’m not considered in that camp. All I’m saying is that if a small move like trading Brown (MN needs depth) would get Kuch to 6 years and not insult him, then getter done.

Why would we trade Brown? He's very good at his role and gives us good depth scoring, we need depth too especially on the bottom 6 unless you want Condra and Conacher in the lineup.

How would we insult Kucherov with a 2 or 3 year bridge deal? Lots of players have gotten that type of deal before. I also don't know why we would give him 6 years when we gave Stamkos and Hedman 8, while they are 4 and 3 years older.

 

[Bobby Orr's Knees]

How would we insult Kucherov with a 2 or 3 year bridge deal? Lots of players have gotten that type of deal before. I also don't know why we would give him 6 years when we gave Stamkos and Hedman 8, while they are 4 and 3 years older.

Bridge deals were popular a few years ago, but not so much now. When all Kucherov comps are getting $6m plus long term deals, how do you offer your best scorer a much lesser deal in both $$ and term?

 

[MattM92]

Bridge deals were popular a few years ago, but not so much now. When all Kucherov comps are getting $6m plus long term deals, how do you offer your best scorer a much lesser deal in both $$ and term?

Because those players will be making less than him in 2-3 years.

 

[FDfranklin]

If Condra gets claimed how does he not sign for 6 years? That would give us over 6 mil. He is not as good as Gudraeu, Florida taxes and all.

Someone please claim Condra..

 

[Bobby Orr's Knees]

Because those players will be making less than him in 2-3 years.

Ask Steven Stamkos about that. One injury and things change. It's not secret that players value security above all.

 

[Byrddog]

Bridge deals were popular a few years ago, but not so much now. When all Kucherov comps are getting $6m plus long term deals, how do you offer your best scorer a much lesser deal in both $$ and term?

Exactly, In the one you deleted you also said he would bolt after a bridge and I also think that is 100% correct. You do not cheap out on players of his caliber.

The hard thing in the next 12 months is going to be identifying the guys you plan to head into the future with. We will not be able to sign all the talent needing a raise and remain under the cap and line up 23 players. And keep all of them content. Being able to compete for a cup is a reason for UFA's to give a team a discount because they have already made a load of money. RFA's expect to be pain to there comp's. Currently the team has it two big buck players signed in Hedman and Stammer. Filp is the only player that is on a bloated contract followed close by Callahan so those two are the logical choices to cut loose but doing that opens up a new can of worms. Any team needs veterans around for stability in the room and on the ice. Some decisions are gonna have to be made and some people are going to be ******** when a couple good players are moved to lock up a team that will compete for multiple cups in the next 10 years.

 

[Bobby Orr's Knees]

Exactly, In the one you deleted you also said he would bolt after a bridge and I also think that is 100% correct. You do not cheap out on players of his caliber.

Yeah, I didn't want to post something that is based on speculation alone. But I definitely believe that when you force a valuable player in a bridge deal, it's not a win-win like some people perceive it.

 

[DFC]

We have to see what the actual deal is.

 

[HoseEmDown]

Bridge deals were popular a few years ago, but not so much now. When all Kucherov comps are getting $6m plus long term deals, how do you offer your best scorer a much lesser deal in both $$ and term?

Bridge deals are still popular, not sure where you get they're a thing of the past? Look at Monahan, Barkov and MacKinnon they had a better 3 years on their ELC Kucherov had a bad rookie year that's knocking him back a bit. His playoffs have been great so you could say he has that above those players.

How many bridge deals fail? More than likely it leads to a big money deal. Stamkos even with his injury got more per year on the next deal. Look at Subban he got a bridge, won a Norris and then became the highest paid defender. A bridge deal is not an insult.

 

[Bobby Orr's Knees]

A bridge deal is not an insult.

I don't think bridge deal is an insult. I think it is not in the organization's best interest long term. But lets wait till the deal is done, may be having an argument about nothing. Ideal situation for Tampa is 6/6. May still happen.

 

[Werewolf]

Exactly, In the one you deleted you also said he would bolt after a bridge and I also think that is 100% correct. You do not cheap out on players of his caliber.

The hard thing in the next 12 months is going to be identifying the guys you plan to head into the future with. We will not be able to sign all the talent needing a raise and remain under the cap and line up 23 players. And keep all of them content. Being able to compete for a cup is a reason for UFA's to give a team a discount because they have already made a load of money. RFA's expect to be pain to there comp's. Currently the team has it two big buck players signed in Hedman and Stammer. Filp is the only player that is on a bloated contract followed close by Callahan so those two are the logical choices to cut loose but doing that opens up a new can of worms. Any team needs veterans around for stability in the room and on the ice. Some decisions are gonna have to be made and some people are going to be ******** when a couple good players are moved to lock up a team that will compete for multiple cups in the next 10 years.

From the bolded ... we'll be able to field 23 players because the up and coming players on ELCs are better than the ones they are replacing and cheaper. Vladdy > Filp, Stephens > Brown, Howden > Boyle, Erne > Paquette, Point > everything in our bottom 6, etc. etc.

Second bolded ... we needed the veterans because our team was young and inexperienced at the NHL level. Now these young players have 3 playoffs behind them and are considered veterans ... we don't need veterans any more. We can move said veterans like Filp / Callahan / Boyle because Stamkos / Palat / Hedman, etc are not young anymore. The culture of the franchise is stable and the kids coming in are C's & A's for their junior teams and some of them have been Team Canada/ Czech junior captains.

Palat / Stamkos / Drouin - Core
Killorn / Johnson / Kucherov - Core

Fill in the bottom 6 holes next 3 years with (players ages in 3 years): Stephens 22, Howden 21, Erne 24, Point 23, Vladdy 26, Joseph 22, Cirelli 22, etc. Even if one of the core is not able to be re-signed our depth will be so much stronger ... and our core will still be in its prime.

Yes, its an awkward transition since the previous veteran regime have a bit too much term and $s assigned to their value. Honestly, if you told me ... "werewolf, knowing what you know now. Would you still give Filp, Cally, etc. them contracts and roll the dice on not going on those runs the past three seasons". I would not give up the last three years and would do it over again ... this is the funnest 3 year ride of hockey I've seen in my lifetime as a Lightning fan.

Yzerman's job is far from impossible at this point - it will be a slow transition but I doubt this is the best team we'll field in the next 7/8 years of Stamkos/Hedman's contracts.

 

[HoseEmDown]

I don't think bridge deal is an insult. I think it is not in the organization's best interest long term. But lets wait till the deal is done, may be having an argument about nothing. Ideal situation for Tampa is 6/6. May still happen.

Not really. Ideal would be 5x2. Give us an extra mil for next offseason and in 2 years Filpulla and Garrison deals are done if they haven't been moved by then so we can give him his 6 to 8 year deal.

 

[Absolut]

Not really. Ideal would be 5x2. Give us an extra mil for next offseason and in 2 years Filpulla and Garrison deals are done if they haven't been moved by then so we can give him his 6 to 8 year deal.

5x2 = you lose a 25 year old Kucherov to free agency. And it may be totally ok with all the talent on the team, but that's a different question. The Rangers in particular would give an arm and a leg for Kucherov. They need a young likeable scoring star that will light up MSG. Kucherov is young, talented, charismatic and speaks good English. NY has huge Russian fan base on top of that. Kuch would be a lot more valuable to the Rangers then he'd be to Tampa. Islanders will be next in line. Detroit. Toronto. Unless he gets injured or falls off the cliff, 5x2 guarantees that Kucherov will be gone in 2 years.

 

[Werewolf]

5x2 = you lose a 25 year old Kucherov to free agency. And it may be totally ok with all the talent on the team, but that's a different question. The Rangers in particular would give an arm and a leg for Kucherov. They need a young likeable scoring star that will light up MSG. Kucherov is young, talented, charismatic and speaks good English. NY has huge Russian fan base on top of that. Kuch would be a lot more valuable to the Rangers then he'd be to Tampa. Islanders will be next in line. Detroit. Toronto. Unless he gets injured or falls off the cliff, 5x2 guarantees that Kucherov will be gone in 2 years.

And by "guaranteed to leave" you mean "RFA with arbitration rights"?

 

[CupsOverCash]

Yeah, I didn't want to post something that is based on speculation alone. But I definitely believe that when you force a valuable player in a bridge deal, it's not a win-win like some people perceive it.

A bridge deal is obviously not what a player wants. He wants long term guaranteed money and job security.

I think in many situations you guys are right it would upset the player to the point that he wouldn't want to return after that contract is up. But I don't think this is the case here.

I think the bridge is what makes sense for this team right now. We have a lot of good players. This team is very good and young. It's not SYs job to make players happy. It's his job to keep this team consistently competitive and to keep them happy.

Sometimes as a player playing on a good team like TB you have to make sacrifices to help the team out. I think that is the case here. Kuch could no doubt get a lot more on the open market but a contending team would be in the same position.

The bright side is this team is in a state that helps out with no in state tax. So we can have average down more than these other players around the league. So in a way it's not a terrible thing for these players.

Plus Kuch likes it here. All the guys seem to like it here. They win, they have great chemistry amongst teammates, ownership is great, and the city and weather are great. A bridge deal is not dangerous in this situation. Maybe if we were TB from 6-7 years ago yes.

 

[Absolut]

And by "guaranteed to leave" you mean "RFA with arbitration rights"?

I mean an offer sheet becomes much more of a possibility for a 25 FRA with arbitration rights. GMs aren't willing to rock with boat for a guy coming of the ELC, it's considered to be unethical. After the bridge deal, Kucherov does not have to choose arbitration. And at that point, other GMs will not hesitate to extend offer sheets. Tampa's cap situation ain't getting any better, with all the tremendous talent on the team that needs to be retained. But if you think that it's 'ideal' to give a player of Kuch's caliber a bridge deal (which I am sure is the last thing he wants), that's fine. We'll agree to disagree.

 

[Byrddog]

From the bolded ... we'll be able to field 23 players because the up and coming players on ELCs are better than the ones they are replacing and cheaper. Vladdy > Filp, Stephens > Brown, Howden > Boyle, Erne > Paquette, Point > everything in our bottom 6, etc. etc.

Second bolded ... we needed the veterans because our team was young and inexperienced at the NHL level. Now these young players have 3 playoffs behind them and are considered veterans ... we don't need veterans any more. We can move said veterans like Filp / Callahan / Boyle because Stamkos / Palat / Hedman, etc are not young anymore. The culture of the franchise is stable and the kids coming in are C's & A's for their junior teams and some of them have been Team Canada/ Czech junior captains.

Palat / Stamkos / Drouin - Core
Killorn / Johnson / Kucherov - Core

Fill in the bottom 6 holes next 3 years with (players ages in 3 years): Stephens 22, Howden 21, Erne 24, Point 23, Vladdy 26, Joseph 22, Cirelli 22, etc. Even if one of the core is not able to be re-signed our depth will be so much stronger ... and our core will still be in its prime.

Yes, its an awkward transition since the previous veteran regime have a bit too much term and $s assigned to their value. Honestly, if you told me ... "werewolf, knowing what you know now. Would you still give Filp, Cally, etc. them contracts and roll the dice on not going on those runs the past three seasons". I would not give up the last three years and would do it over again ... this is the funnest 3 year ride of hockey I've seen in my lifetime as a Lightning fan.

Yzerman's job is far from impossible at this point - it will be a slow transition but I doubt this is the best team we'll field in the next 7/8 years of Stamkos/Hedman's contracts.

I know exactly where your coming from and you took it a step further in making your choices for the core going forward. That is what Yzer needs to decide. I do somewhat disagree with your definition of veteran however. Hedman and Stammer at 25 and 26 are still not meeting my litmus test as veterans. Sure Stammer has a number of years in the league and Hedman has personally developed. The steadiness of those 28 to 31 year olds that can still contribute is invaluable to any team not just the Bolts. You made the hard choices for your core going forward thats what Yzer has to do along with trying to deal with the NMC's of players that no longer fit. All the while dealing with the cap. I think right now that Names and Paquette could play larger roles on other teams and in two years are due raises as well.

Right now the Bolts can ice a top 9 as good as any team in the league and it really does not matter much who is on the 4th line due to the limited minutes they will be getting anyway. As long as they can prevent teams from scoring on them for 5 to 10 minutes thats all we should ask since they are just part of a rest rotation for the top 9.

Personally I would like to see a trade that puts a young top4 type dman into the mix right now a 22 year old that will be ready for top 4 in two years would be my focus.

The NMC's are going to be troublesome and here is why I think. This is a team that will compete for a cup over the next number of years there is no incentive for a player to waive that NMC so we could well be stuck there. And I see a number of people here using the LTIR in there thinking for Callahan well thats just not gonna work. He is expected to return before Thanksgiving. Even if he is delayed a while he is not going to miss the entire year which is really what would be required to use the LTIR for cap purposes. This injury will also lessen his value and be costly in his on ice performance. I do not recall a player returning after this injury and being as good as they were prior and I have been following this game for nearly 4 decades, We can be optimistic but history does not support positive outcome. He will return but the condition is not bad enough to qualify him as LTIR and his performance may well slide him to 4th line. So thats a real kick in the teeth. A saving grace could be that the other two players he is on ice with can hide a lot of his regression.l

Im not sure what Kuch ends up doing I just hope it is not a bridge. This guy is too valuable to piss away.